Obligatory nitpick: “ordnance”. If he was peddling a legal notice they probably wouldn’t have sent out the demolition experts. Probably.
Edit: missed the previous nitpick. Well, doing what we do best, I guess!
Thing is, some of the words in there seem to mean things that are not obvious. The court reads stuff in there that I would not have seen just by looking. Not to mention, some phrases well regulated militia do not seem to mean anything.
That one stumped my students today. On their quiz I asked them which amendment dealt with “A well-regulated militia…” They knew the second half, but had never been taught/ignored in the book the first half.
Which I why I’d love to have a THIRD AMENDMENT RIGHTS! placard when I’m in a counter-march.
But attacking congress wasn’t a mistake? I suppose he’ll find out pretty soon on that.
He better watch out, that’s Trump’s line. We all know how much Trump likes to sue.
I follow the reddit “What is this thing?” and you’d be surprised how many people find old unexploded ordnance laying around. I expect a certain amount to be found in Europe because of WWII, but quite a bit is found in the US too. And not just around former training grounds or bases. A lot is found in lakes/rivers by people that fish with magnets to find stuff on the bottom. It happens so frequently they have a bot that marks items that appear to be UXO and tells you to leave it alone and who to contact.
Totally agree. I don’t think the vast majority are legally mentally ill anyway. I think they just want what they want and fuck everyone else. I don’t know, is lack of empathy a mental illness? Can you even treat it?
How many of them remember them all? High schoolers should have that down pretty well.
Oh, that’s a shame. When I saw “explosive experts” in the blurb for the link, I figured out what was meant!
I do believe this came up in some U.S. court in the past few years. The details escape me, but IIRC it had something to do with the police using his property for surveillance of some kind. He argued against it on 3rd Amendment grounds and the courts basically told him to go fuck himself. I’ll try to dig up the story.
I used to do lawn care on a Naval base as a contractor. We were warned that if we ever turned up something old, metal, and weird, don’t mess with it and call a supervisor. Luckily I don’t know if anyone who ever found something.
I did used to have to trim around the EOD building and the guys there would joke about being careful to avoid land mines.
Here is a relevant 3rd Amendment case from Nevada. I’d summarize for the TLDR folks but I’d be doing the facts a disservice. Henderson Incident Raises 3rd Amendment Issue
What was the result?
Here’s a Washington Post article about the followup, but I can’t get past the paywall. The title basically says it all though. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/03/23/federal-court-rejects-third-amendment-claim-against-police-officers/
From that Post article
In this recent ruling, federal district court Judge Andrew Gordon dismissed the Third Amendment claim [HT: VC reader Sean Flaim]. Although it occurred several weeks ago, the ruling seems to have gotten very little attention from either the media or legal commentators outside Nevada. That is unfortunate, because the ruling raises important issues about the scope of the Third Amendment, and its applicability against state and local governments. Here are the key passages from the opinion:
In the present case, various officers of the HPD and NLVPD entered into and occupied Linda’s and Michael’s home for an unspecified amount of time (seemingly nine hours), but certainly for less than twenty-four hours. The relevant questions are thus whether municipal police should be considered soldiers, and whether the time they spent in the house could be considered quartering. To both questions, the answer must be no.
I hold that a municipal police officer is not a soldier for purposes of the Third Amendment. This squares with the purpose of the Third Amendment because this was not a military intrusion into a private home, and thus the intrusion is more effectively protected by the Fourth Amendment. Because I hold that municipal officers are not soldiers for the purposes of this question, I need not reach the question of whether the occupation at issue in this case constitutes quartering, though I suspect it would not.
It makes sense, cops aren’t soldiers.
And it does sound like a 4th amendment violation.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I’m not legal scholar, but I have to say I’m disappointed in how narrowly the judge read the 3rd Amendment in this case. Certainly the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments apply to citizens w/r/t actions of the police. Policing, as we know it, didn’t exist in 1789, but nevertheless no cop in this country can show up at your house and demand to take something of yours without a warrant (4th Amendment). Well, they can, but they can’t punish you for not letting them in. No court in this country is going to say otherwise. But I’m sure the framers of the Constitution wrote the amendment with the view that they were preventing soliders from taking your shit. It’s just that every court in this country operates from the belief that this applies to police as well. So why shouldn’t the 3rd?
kindalike the joke that ends with the line:
… but you fuck ONE sheep
There’s still stuff from WWI that turns up in Europe. I went on a tour of WWI battlefields in Belgium a few years ago and there are farmers that still find things in their fields every year while plowing; they showed us some of it. ‘Iron harvest’ still threatens European farmers | The Western Producer
Not to worry, I get temporarily baffled by random things all the time and manage to cope with it okay. The momentary surge of enlightenment when you suddenly understand what it was that was confusing you is worth the wait! 
Seems like “playing chicken” is moe dangerous than one would think!
Knife-wielding roosters kill 2 men in cockfighting events in India
Two men have reportedly been killed by knife-wielding roosters in separate cockfights in India.
To mark the three-day celebration of the Hindu Makar Sankrati festival, people gathered to hold cockfights in the Kakinada and East Godavari districts on Sunday, according to reports.
During the incident in Kakinada, Gande Suryapraksha Rao, the 43-year-old owner of one of the fighting roosters, bled to death after being slashed by his prized cock.
More at the link.
Yeah more dumb reporting (and I’m a journalist). Especially the following in the sub-head in nightshadea’s link preview:
“their owners are living a worst-case scenario of drought in the West.”
No. This is nothing. It can, and will, get a lot worse than that. And then even worstier after that. So take your bullshit clickbait exaggerations and go fuck yourself, moran [sic] (the writer, not nightshadea).